« How to 'Temper' a New Photobook | Main | Weese in Wisconsin »

Saturday, 17 September 2011

Comments

nle;wrm

This is not yet in the urban dictionary. It stands for Not Long Enough; Want to Read More.

This level of detail is great. It is like back in the day when messing around with D-76 or Pyro and throwing in a few grains of this or that to alter the response curve.

The more I understand about a process the better I can exploit it to achieve the outcomes I desire. So many thanks to Dave, Royce and Ctein. More please.

The variety in the web sites is quite interesting.

fjf, there's a lot more that could be said about this. The science behind how and why printers make the dots they do (for all types of printers - most notably for us offset, laser and inkjet, but even woodblock, letterpress and other ways of getting ink on paper) plus the way film and photographic paper turn light into pigments, well, it's complex.

In a perfect world, a printer that accepts input in the range 0-255 for each input channel would have the right-angles in that response curve right at 0 and 255. That is, at 0 you would have as much ink as possible on the paper without getting drips, and at 255 you would have no ink. More importantly, at 1, you'd have slightly less than total ink coverage, and at 254, you'd have as little ink as the printer could possibly put down. 16-bit printing would work the same way, only with finer steps.

For a number of reasons, it doesn't happen that way in the real world. Ulichney's "Digital Halftoning", ISBN 978-0262210096 covers a lot of the technology and tricks up to 1987 when it was published, and I strongly recommend it if you're interested in the history and science of turning images into ink, but it's very much a reference / text. Not light reading at all, and there's been more than 20 years of art since then.

I'd love to be able to write more on the subject, but I need to balance that with writing code for Photoshop, finding time for my (many) other hobbies, and having time to eat and sleep. So will there be more? Probably at some point, but any such writing will be done in my copious free time.

Dave:
Thanks for responding. I'll try and locate the book and I'm sure Mike would jack up his already generous per word pay rates to obtain more on this topic and compensate you for family and hobby time etc :-)

When Jobs introduced the NexT he ran Display Postscript for screen output with standard Postscript for print output. Using the same render engine for both seems an elegant solution provided there is accurate screen calibration.

Thanks for your work on PS. Great product. Like Mike, I find it makes sleepless nights most enjoyable.

Cheers!

The comments to this entry are closed.